"Pakeha"
Lance Wicks
>
>Nice story, pity it's a complete load of bollocks.
>
>Maori, like English and other languages, is constantly evolving, so
>whatever its origins are, 'Pakeha' is now a completely harmless word
>meaning a New Zealander of non-Maori (usu. European) descent. Nothing
>more, no negative conotations.
>
>
What abou the terms "Bantu", "Nigga", "Black". Which ARE considered
negative??
Hmmmm......some bias some where perhaps?
Funny thing also, the friends who use the term "Nigga" the most are not
the "Pakeha"'s
Why is it that terms like "black" which I would hazard to guess started
of as a purely decriptive term (no negative connotations) is now
considered rude and insulting, where "Pakeha" is now a politically
correct term?
Hmmm.... I wonder who the racists are?
Lance
--
--==^==-- ^----------------------^ --==^==--
Napier, N.Z. | Lance Wicks | Napier, N.Z.
The Art Deco City | lwi...@central.co.nz | The Art Deco City
--==< >==-- \----------------------/ --==< >==--
| Snail-Mail To: |
|PO BOX 816, Napier. |
\--------------------/
james buckle
"whites" and people of "european origin" can come from a multiplicity
of places in the world, "pakeha" only exist in n.z.. "pakeha" defines
my ethnicity very well, it specifies my home country and is a word that
is unique to the culture of my home country. i don't find it racist at
all, in fact i identify with it strongly. that is not to say it can't
be used in a racist manner.
just my 0.02,
-james
________________________________________________________________________
_
Yakkitty schmakkitty blah, blah, blah - Taz senior
NARF !!! - Pinky
I like maxims that don't encourage behaviour modification - Calvin
________________________________________________________________________
_
as well as being other things, james buckle is pj...@waikato.ac.nz
Jason Rumney
> Hi, I saw your note in nz.general. I can't use the Pnews mailer here
> else I'd have replied there.
> An elderly Maori gentleman was saying on talkback radio that "Pakeha"
> isn't a Maori word at all, thats why the confusion over the definition.
> He said it started in the Bay of Islands last century, when the local
> Maoris noticed the profanity of the sailors, mostly whalers I gather.
> At the slightest prompting, they'd go "Bugger you". After awhile, the
> locals began referring to them as "Bugger you's", which changed over time
> to the present form. That actually seems to make sense, and is quite
> funny
> to boot as well.
> Feel free to post this 'definition' if you like, it made me giggle when
> I heard it.
Nice story, pity it's a complete load of bollocks.
Maori, like English and other languages, is constantly evolving, so
whatever its origins are, 'Pakeha' is now a completely harmless word
meaning a New Zealander of non-Maori (usu. European) descent. Nothing
more, no negative conotations.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Logic's mad and shame doesn't care what you think.
- Sam Phillips
------------------------- Jason Rumney (jas...@pec.co.nz) ----------------
John Thayer Jensen
>"pakeha", as a term, refers specifically to people like myself: new
>zealand nationals of european extraction. there is no other word for this,
>and no other group of people may call themselves pakeha.
>
>that's something quite special.
I hereby apologise for ignorantly having called myself a 'pakeha' (tm) in
the past. I did not know that only NZ nationals of European extraction
could use the term. I shall henceforth refer to myself as a pakehu, a
word I have just invented, to refer to American nationals with New
Zealand permanent residence and a surname of Jensen. Others need not
apply.
jj "who wonders what to call his relations back in the States"
--
John Thayer Jensen 64 9 373 7599 ext. 7543
System Administrator 64 9 373 7406 (FAX)
Commerce Computer Services 64 25 770 862 (mobile)
Auckland University j.je...@auckland.ac.nz
Private Bag 92019
AUCKLAND
New Zealand
Michael Lyford
may be a New Zealander of European Origin, but I am NOT a "pakeha". And
if I say I'm not, I'm not. That's my right.
And, BTW, I wouldn't be too sure about the word 'black' being racist. Why
is 'black' racist and 'white' not? When I was in the States I was asked
my race a few times. The first time I didn't know what to answer. (This
was on the phone) So I said, "Umm, well, I'm a New Zealander", and the
person replied, "Oh, OK. But are you black, white, latino or asian..." I
replied that I was white, and we proceeded to the next question. I have to
tell you though that this was in L.A.. Many "black Americans" I know
refer to themselves as being black. I'm sure just as many do not.
If you label me, you negate me. (who was it who said that??)
--
Mike Lyford, New Zealand (mly...@iconz.co.nz)
Stephen Wray
Lance> In article <jasonr7n1...@hal.pec.co.nz>, jas...@pec.co.nz
Lance> says...
Lance> What abou the terms "Bantu", "Nigga", "Black". Which ARE
Lance> considered negative?? Hmmmm......some bias some where perhaps?
Lance> Funny thing also, the friends who use the term "Nigga" the most
Lance> are not the "Pakeha"'s
Indeed. I've known plenty of black people -- here, I don't mean Maaaori or
polynesians since they are not black (I grew up in the UK, where blacks are
black and whites are white ;-).
In fact I really miss black people :-(
To the point -- *lots* of black people call one another nigger.
Not as an insult either.
However, they get up tight when non-niggers call them niggers.
Very, very up tight.
Humans are very strange.
BTW -- I am a Maaaori. You wouldn't know it just by looking though.
Which is probably the case with about 80% or so of NZ Maaaori.
"black" "nigger" etc are not terribly good descriptive terms for Maaaori.
Similarly, "pakeha" for ummm sort of pinky very light tan NZers.
In fact, my adopted dad (who has not a trace of non-european in him)
is much darker than about 90% of Maaaori I've ever known. He lives on the
sea in Hauraki gulf/Gt.Barrier etc.
Confused? You will be!
;-}
---
**********************T***H***E***L***E***M***A**********************
44. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of
result, is every way perfect. -- LIBER AL vel LEGIS
******************************IN*LVX*********************************
Stephen Wray <stephe...@vuw.ac.nz>
Jason Rumney
In article <47bh9s$8...@central.co.nz>,
lwi...@central.co.nz (Lance Wicks) writes:
> In article <jasonr7n1...@hal.pec.co.nz>, jas...@pec.co.nz says...
>>
>> Maori, like English and other languages, is constantly evolving, so
>> whatever its origins are, 'Pakeha' is now a completely harmless word
>> meaning a New Zealander of non-Maori (usu. European) descent. Nothing
>> more, no negative conotations.
>>
> What abou the terms "Bantu", "Nigga", "Black". Which ARE considered
> negative??
> Hmmmm......some bias some where perhaps?
Where? If Pakeha is not generally considered negative, and those
above are (which is debatable), then there is no comparison - why
pretend there is? In most cases anyway, it is not the word that is
negative, it is the context in which it is used.
> Funny thing also, the friends who use the term "Nigga" the most are not
> the "Pakeha"'s
'Nigga' is a bit like 'Queer' in that it has been reclaimed to be used
proudly by (at least some of) those to whom it refers.
I would be careful who I called a Nigga, and what context I used it in
though.
> Hmmm.... I wonder who the racists are?
i) The ones who use otherwise harmless words describing ethnic origin
as insults.
ii) The ones who object to the use of words because they have come from
another language.
Miche
and...@cerberus.nui-wgtn.gen.nz (Andrew Ruthven) writes:
> I agree totally, I personally find pakeha offensive. I have heard many
> negative connotations associated with the word. I too am a New Zealander.
Well I've heard Maori used pejoratively too - remember the 'Maori PT'
comment John Banks made in parliament a while ago?
Miche
------------
michelle...@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
MY opinions, NOT theirs!
"If I had been around when Rubens was painting,
I would have been revered as a fabulous model.
Kate Moss? Well, she would have been the
paintbrush..."
- Dawn French
Martin & Anne Kane
> An elderly Maori gentleman was saying on talkback radio that "Pakeha"
>isn't a Maori word at all, thats why the confusion over the definition.
Lovely definition :-)
I thought it meant "someone new - from the sea"
Cheers!
Martin
--
Martin & Anne Kane orga...@southern.co.nz
http://southern.co.nz/~organist/
keit...@central.co.nz
ka...@organist.southern.co.nz says...
>
>In article <47bbt1$4...@central.co.nz> lwi...@central.co.nz writes:
>
>> An elderly Maori gentleman was saying on talkback radio that "Pakeha"
>>isn't a Maori word at all, thats why the confusion over the definition.
>
>Lovely definition :-)
>
>I thought it meant "someone new - from the sea"
>
person from China would be a Pakeha just as much as an African person of
"Negroid" extraction, born in Africa, or USA.
I consider myself a New Zealander as I was born here.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith McRoberts SUNNY NELSON NZ
Gary Elmes
mly...@iconz.co.nz (Michael Lyford) wrote:
>I am not a "pakeha"! And you can't call me one. I am a New Zealander. I
>may be a New Zealander of European Origin, but I am NOT a "pakeha". And
>if I say I'm not, I'm not. That's my right.
Yes you are. Yes I can. Yes, you're that as well. Yes, you ARE. Whatever you
might think about the word, it is a description that applies to you. You have
no right to veto others' use of language.
+---------- gazza @ iconz.co.nz is Gary Elmes, Auckland, NZ --------+
|"The reasonable man adapts himself to the World, the unreasonable one|
|persists in trying to adapt the World to himself. Therefore all |
|progress depends on unreasonable men." - George Bernard Shaw |
+--------------- public PGP key available on request -----------------+
Gary Elmes
and...@cerberus.nui-wgtn.gen.nz (Andrew Ruthven) wrote:
>According to Michael Lyford <mly...@iconz.co.nz>:
>>I am not a "pakeha"! And you can't call me one. I am a New Zealander. I
>>may be a New Zealander of European Origin, but I am NOT a "pakeha". And
>>if I say I'm not, I'm not. That's my right.
>
By and large, I find they are nice enough people...
Gary Elmes
jas...@pec.co.nz (Jason Rumney) wrote:
>In article <47bh9s$8...@central.co.nz>,
> lwi...@central.co.nz (Lance Wicks) writes:
>> Hmmm.... I wonder who the racists are?
>
>i) The ones who use otherwise harmless words describing ethnic origin
> as insults.
>ii) The ones who object to the use of words because they have come from
> another language.
>
Kia ora, Jason!
TIGER
>>may be a New Zealander of European Origin, but I am NOT a "pakeha". And
>>if I say I'm not, I'm not. That's my right.
>
you
>might think about the word, it is a description that applies to you. You
have
>no right to veto others' use of language.
Does this mean I'm allowed to maoris coons?
TIGER, D.A
Michael Lyford
>Whatever you might think about the word, it is a description that applies
>to you. You have no right to veto others' use of language.
When it applies to me I have. "Nigger" is a word too, but I don't condone
its usage because people find it offensive. I find 'pakeha' offensive.
Simon Lyall
>In article <47bnrl$k...@status.gen.nz>,
> mly...@iconz.co.nz (Michael Lyford) wrote:
>>I am not a "pakeha"! And you can't call me one. I am a New Zealander. I
>>may be a New Zealander of European Origin, but I am NOT a "pakeha". And
>>if I say I'm not, I'm not. That's my right.
>Yes you are. Yes I can. Yes, you're that as well. Yes, you ARE. Whatever you
>might think about the word, it is a description that applies to you. You have
>no right to veto others' use of language.
Now all you have to do is get the niggers, chinks, honkies, fags,
currys, spics, coons, abos, poms, paddies, japs and everybody else to
follow this policy and nobody will have a problem.
--
Simon J. Lyall. | Busy | Email - si...@darkmere.gen.nz
"Inside me Im Screaming, Nobody pays any attention. " | MT.
hawt...@waikato.ac.nz
>
> Maori, like English and other languages, is constantly evolving, so
> whatever its origins are, 'Pakeha' is now a completely harmless word
> meaning a New Zealander of non-Maori (usu. European) descent. Nothing
> more, no negative conotations.
>
Any word can be given negative connotations if you say it in a certain
way. `Pakeha' can be said in an insulting way and intended as an insult.
So, by the way, can `Maori'. Yet usually these words are not insults.
I prefer to look at the context in which the word is being used. If
someone is using a certain word in an insulting way and intending it to
be an insult, it is just plain silly to pretend that the term is purely
neutral. It is equally silly getting all insulted by someones choice of
words when no insult was intended. To me, insult is a matter of intention
and not of vocabulary.
Ian H
Jeremy Bowen
> I however, would prefer Maaori to Moari :-) (I hope it wasn't intentional)
^
What's wrong with simply Maori.
This use of the double vowel has appeared (especially around Auckland
University) recently and is entirely un-necessary.
We don't do funny things to the SPELLING of the words in other
languages to make them easier to pronounce so why do it to Maori ?
(Accents and umlauts are different beasties)
Maori has only existed as a written language in post european times
but has some fairly strict (and simple) rules for pronunciation.
In fact, if you can pronounce the 5 vowel sounds you have got the
language pretty well mastered. (The other trick is to break the
sylables after every vowel.)
--
# o@C>-
# Jeremy Bowen jer...@pec.co.nz Me not PEC(NZ) Ltd # __/___
# "Staying with you requires a degree of stupidity of # {_XX_(_@=
# which I no longer feel capable." . . . Avon # o@C>-
# "Now you're just being modest." . . . Blake # o@C>-
SquidBoy
>Any word can be given negative connotations if you say it in a certain
>way. `Pakeha' can be said in an insulting way and intended as an insult.
>So, by the way, can `Maori'. Yet usually these words are not insults.
>I prefer to look at the context in which the word is being used. If
>someone is using a certain word in an insulting way and intending it to
>be an insult, it is just plain silly to pretend that the term is purely
>neutral. It is equally silly getting all insulted by someones choice of
>words when no insult was intended. To me, insult is a matter of intention
>and not of vocabulary.
Ok people, lets get things in perspective!
We have a word. I would think it shouldn't really matter what word it is...
(so lets not pick on the word 'Pakeha'). What does this word mean? Sure, YOU
(me/whoever) think it's going to means something -specific-, perhaps even
directly relevant to OTHERS but does it follow that the 'others' the -word- is
affecting view it exactly how YOU (me/whoever) view it.
short answer... NO!
So why don't we all stop being so god-damned picky, and just accept that
people (and their opinions) differ. And there is no way you can -force- your
viewpoint on another without there being difficulties.
He's a Pakeha... We's is Pakeha's... they's is Pakehas... Me's is Pakeha, who
gives a damn.
Matt (perhaps one of them Pakeha thingies) :)
Everyting is for the eye these days- TV, life, look, the movies. Nothing is just for the mind. The next generation will have eyeballs as big as cantaloupes and no brain at all.
-Fred Allen
Martin & Anne Kane
>
>jas...@pec.co.nz (Jason Rumney) expounded:
>
>> I however, would prefer Maaori to Moari :-) (I hope it wasn't intentional)
> ^
>What's wrong with simply Maori.
Simply - the double vowel indicates that there is really meant to be a
line over the "a" to make is officially correct. Most computers can,
but who really wants to make the effort at 340 words per minute? :-)!
Jeremy Bowen
> Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz (Jeremy Bowen) writes:
>
> > What's wrong with simply Maori.
> >
> > This use of the double vowel has appeared (especially around Auckland
> > University) recently and is entirely un-necessary.
>
> It is not unnecessary - one of my lecturers this year, who works in
> both the History and Maaori Studies departments told us to be very
> careful of single and double vowels - apparently the meanings of some
> words change according to which type of vowel is used. (I haven't run
> across any yet but that doesn't mean there aren't any.)
This is the most unlikely explanation I've heard so far. There are
only the 5 basic vowel sounds in Maori.
Moana and the Moa Hunters (I think) had a song in the charts earlier
this year which pronounces them correctly. Either your lecturer is
wrong, or all the stuff they've been putting on TV in Maori language
year, is.
Who do you believe ?
> > We don't do funny things to the SPELLING of the words in other
> > languages to make them easier to pronounce so why do it to Maori ?
> > (Accents and umlauts are different beasties)
>
> The double vowel is the same thing as an accent or umlaut, apparently.
Apparently NOT. An accent changes the way the vowel sounds. This is
not a problem in Maori as the vowel sounds DON'T change.
Jason Rumney
> This is the most unlikely explanation I've heard so far. There are
> only the 5 basic vowel sounds in Maori.
Which is why Maori is sometimes spelt Maaori - the "a" is a long
vowel, which is exactly the same as two short ones run together if you
belong to the 5 vowel-sound school.
Stephen Judd
> This is the most unlikely explanation I've heard so far. There are
> only the 5 basic vowel sounds in Maori.
>
> Moana and the Moa Hunters (I think) had a song in the charts earlier
> this year which pronounces them correctly. Either your lecturer is
> wrong, or all the stuff they've been putting on TV in Maori language
> year, is.
>
> Who do you believe ?
>
> > > We don't do funny things to the SPELLING of the words in other
> > > languages to make them easier to pronounce so why do it to Maori ?
> > > (Accents and umlauts are different beasties)
> >
> > The double vowel is the same thing as an accent or umlaut, apparently.
>
> Apparently NOT. An accent changes the way the vowel sounds. This is
> not a problem in Maori as the vowel sounds DON'T change.
Depends what you mean by vowel sounds.
There are only five vowels, but they come in two flavours, long and short.
Word meanings are different depending on vowel length, and when I get home
I'm going to look up some examples.
So I think you're kind of right, and sort of wrong. It _is_ useful to
indicate vowel length, and there are only five vowels. The length
(quantity) is distinct from the vowel quality.
FWIW, inasmuch as there is a standard Maori orthography, it definitely
includes indicating long vowels with a macron. I used to double vowels
when I typed, but I don't bother any more, since the whole point is to
prevent ambiguity, and doubled vowel spellings don't achieve this: how can
one tell where the syllable break is in a long vowel/short vowel
combination, or vice versa?
Stephen (who hasn't done Maori since the fifth form, but is surprised at
what he can remember).
PS: you ought to see the ASCII abortions that Germans, Poles and others
who need diacritics have to use!
--
"I think you've said the opposite of | Stephen Judd, User Support Consultant
what you mean. Assuming that is the | School of Education,
case, I must disagree, strongly." | University of Waikato, New Zealand
(Found on sci.lang) | PGP key on request
Edouard Poor
ha...@sloth.southern.co.nz (Phil Anderson) wrote:
>Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz writes:
>>(Accents and umlauts are different beasties)
>
>Um, in what way do you see them as being different? If it helps, by all
>means use a macron over the a when writing the word "Maori". The
>double-a is just a stand in for an a-macron. Do you get annoyed when
>someone writes "ue" instead of an umlauted "u"?
The main problem is that most fonts simply don't contain a set of
vowels with Macrons. Thus the tendancy to double the letter to indicate
a long vowel.
I had the vauge recollection that the macron is originally from
Dutch. Anyone know? The more I think about it the more I'm
unsure about that.
To get Maori in computer form I think you would have to use ISO-8859-1
with a mix of ISO-8859-10 and ISO-8859-4 for the Macrons. The resulting
MIME would probably look quite unpleasent is my guess. Perhaps a
doubled vowel is less intrusive than a message that randomly
bounces between alphabets, even though it might render correctly on
some peoples machines.
Unfortunately most fonts come in ISO Latin 1 and not much more
(at least in the English speaking world).
Does Unicode cover Maori? http://www.stonehand.com/unicode.html
wasn't as helpful as it could be in answering the question for me. I guess
one has to buy the relevant standards...
Cheers,
Edouard.
--
Edouard Poor.
eyle...@wave.co.nz
"Pakeha". I feel proud to be a New Zealander and identify with being a Pakeha.
No negativeness, just pride.
Miche
rfre...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz (Robert Freeman) writes:
> In article <81563314...@sloth.southern.co.nz>,
> Phil Anderson <ha...@sloth.southern.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > I gather that many people find the initial "ng" to be tricky, as it
> > doesn't appear in English. And the "r" can be problematic too - IIRC,
> > it's just a tap rather than a trill.
>
> Really! What about sing, ring, thing, ding etc.
They're not *initial* ngs. What Phil was talking about were words like
Ngaruawahia and Ngapuhi.
Stephen Judd
A quick check in the dictionary last night yielded examples of possible
confusion on every other page.
A few examples:
titi: nipple
tiitii: muttonbird
(what did you have for tea last night?)
haaka: jug
haka: dance
(what do you keep the milk in?)
poopoo: to knead
popoo: to crowd around
(They crowded around the dough?)
(examples from Bruce Bigg's Simple Maori Dictionary).
Vis-a-vis fonts, here at Waikato University we have two fonts called
Helvetica-Maori and Times Maori, where the macron character is substituted
for the umlaut. Dunno what the position on licenses is though.
stephen
Jeremy Bowen
> A quick check in the dictionary last night yielded examples of possible
> confusion on every other page.
>
> A few examples:
>
> titi: nipple
> tiitii: muttonbird
Isn't this pronounced Tee-ee-tee-ee ?
> haaka: jug
.....ha-ah-ka ?
The vowels don't change from short to long do they ? I'm genuinely
interested as this is what I have always been taught and it has been
repeated on TV throughout the year in the Te Reo bits.
Who is right ?
Jeremy Bowen
> Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz writes:
>
> >We don't do funny things to the SPELLING of the words in other
> >languages to make them easier to pronounce so why do it to Maori ?
>
> Y'what?! Did you get someone else to write that for you?
Nope it is all my own work :-)
> I find it hard
> to believe that someone saying that would be familiar with written
> English, let alone other languages.
I'm not sure what you are getting that. Obviously my English
comprehension is not up to it. Maybe you are more familiar with
Ameringlish. The bastardisation that occurs in that language to make
it easier for the plebs to pass their spelling bee's is positively
disgusting to me.
> Of _course_ spelling indicates
> pronunciation. Even English, the mongrel of mongrels, works fairly well
> that way in most cases.
Yeah right. Try "rough" "through" "hic-cough"!!! (I know...exceptions
to every rule and all that)
> >(Accents and umlauts are different beasties)
>
> Um, in what way do you see them as being different? If it helps, by all
> means use a macron over the a when writing the word "Maori". The
> double-a is just a stand in for an a-macron. Do you get annoyed when
> someone writes "ue" instead of an umlauted "u"?
_
Try far and fat. When was the last time you saw far written to
indicate a long vowel sound ?
We don't do it in English. Why do it to Maori ?
> >In fact, if you can pronounce the 5 vowel sounds you have got the
> >language pretty well mastered. (The other trick is to break the
> >sylables after every vowel.)
>
> I gather that many people find the initial "ng" to be tricky, as it
> doesn't appear in English. And the "r" can be problematic too - IIRC,
> it's just a tap rather than a trill.
You point being ?
My point was that there were ONLY 5 vowel sounds. As I understand it
there are NO long and short vowels in the Maori language. The "a"
sound is ALWAYS the same so why accent or double it.
Stephen Judd
Wilkes) wrote:
> As a visitor to these shores I don't understand how "wh" = f
> if the written language is post european. Are there any other
> pronunciations like this.
>
"Wh" is not _exactly_ the same as an English "f", nor is it pronounced the
same wqay across the country. It can vary from something like a "w"
through the "wh" in an RP English "what" to a voiceless bilabial fricative
(!)(put your lips together and blow gently). Pronouncing Maori "wh" like a
labiodental English "f"
is an approximation, AFAIK.
When english missionaries created an orthography "wh" was probably a good
effort on their part. I imagine that in their day Many English speaker
still pronounced the "wh" in words like "what" and "whale" the
old-fashioned way. (That's why old representations of Cockney speech spell
what as "wot", to indicate the Cockney style of "wh" that is now standard
in this country, anyway.)
Interestingly, there are other spellings from the old days that never
caught on; eg Shungi for Hongi (to represent the rougher sound of the
Maori "h"), or a "d" for "t" to indicate the Maori toungue tap against the
roof of the mouth.
It all really depends how accurate you want to be...
Jason Rumney
> As a visitor to these shores I don't understand how "wh" = f
> if the written language is post european.
That depends which part of the country you are in. In some areas
(Whanganui [thats Wanganui, not Fanganui] for example), wh is pronounced
more like the wh in white.
Jeremy Bowen
> > s.j...@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) expounded:
> >
> > > A few examples:
> > >
> > > titi: nipple
****
Give someone enough rope and they'll hang themselves! OK I let it go
the first time but I'll have to take issue with it this time.
Is "titi" a real Maori word ? It sounds awfully like vulgar slang to
me. Not a good word to choose as an example as I would suspect the "i"
has been pronounced more like an English "i"
> I can't remember the content of those clips (it's amazing what a newborn
> does to your short-term memory), but _if_ they really said what you seem
> to be saying, then yes, they are wrong.
Well, I don't believe they are. Especially as "Moana (Maniapoto Jackson ?)
and the Moa Hunters" have a hit single ("a-e-i-o-u") with the exact same
pronounciation. You're not going to tell me that SHE has been
mispronouncing her vowels!
> The five vowels in Maori can be
> short or long, and this makes a difference to a word's meaning. Eg, te
> tupuna with the first "u" short is singular, nga tuupuna with a long "u"
> is plural.
This is the first time I've ever heard this. While it may be true I
find it surprising that it has not made it onto the TV clips which
promote Te Reo Maori.
> Writing two vowel letters to indicate length is simply a clumsy
> substitute for a macron.
And is what I find completely confusing and unnecessary.
Jeremy Bowen
> Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz writes:
> _
> > Try far and fat. When was the last time you saw far written to
> > indicate a long vowel sound ?
> > We don't do it in English. Why do it to Maori ?
>
> One reason we don't do it in English is that the orthography provides
> enough other cues to adequately distinguish when we read.
Complete bollocks. Orthography ?????? What the hell is that ?? Could
you provide an English translation.
Try "far" and "war" then....
> Another is that
> English, like many Indo-European languages, has a rich variety of
> consonants, and these tend to carry the meaning. Try the experiment of
> pronouncing every word with the same vowel, and you will find it quite
> intelligible.
I find most of this sentence unintelligible. Am I missing something ?
This I believe is the crux of the matter: I've always been taught that
in Maori language, there were ONLY 5 vowel sounds. No long and short
variations. Could someone who actually knows what they are talking
about provide an answer here ?
Stephen Judd
> Give someone enough rope and they'll hang themselves! OK I let it go
> the first time but I'll have to take issue with it this time.
>
> Is "titi" a real Maori word ? It sounds awfully like vulgar slang to
> me. Not a good word to choose as an example as I would suspect the "i"
> has been pronounced more like an English "i"
It's in Bruce Biggs' Maori Dictionary defined as breast or nipple. it is
an amusing coincidence, but so what? Bruce Biggs' credentails are about as
good as they com in this field.
> > I can't remember the content of those clips (it's amazing what a newborn
> > does to your short-term memory), but _if_ they really said what you seem
> > to be saying, then yes, they are wrong.
>
> Well, I don't believe they are. Especially as "Moana (Maniapoto Jackson ?)
> and the Moa Hunters" have a hit single ("a-e-i-o-u") with the exact same
> pronounciation. You're not going to tell me that SHE has been
> mispronouncing her vowels!
Uh-huh. How many times must I repeat this: the issue is vowel length. Yes
there are five of them, and equally, they can be long or short. Long a,
short a. Long e, short e. Etc.
> > The five vowels in Maori can be
> > short or long, and this makes a difference to a word's meaning. Eg, te
> > tupuna with the first "u" short is singular, nga tuupuna with a long "u"
> > is plural.
>
> This is the first time I've ever heard this. While it may be true I
> find it surprising that it has not made it onto the TV clips which
> promote Te Reo Maori.
It is true. I looked it up, and I supplied you with a reference. What
other evidence would you like?
> > Writing two vowel letters to indicate length is simply a clumsy
> > substitute for a macron.
>
> And is what I find completely confusing and unnecessary.
Because you refuse to let go of your idea that "there are only five vowels
in Maori, and how you say them makes no difference."
Michael Lyford
>I'm not sure what you are getting that. Obviously my English
>comprehension is not up to it. Maybe you are more familiar with
>Ameringlish. The bastardisation that occurs in that language to make
>it easier for the plebs to pass their spelling bee's is positively
>disgusting to me.
My my. We do have a bit of a language superiority complex, don't we!
Languages change. You may think American English is a "bastardisation",
but I'm sure Shakespeare would think the same of you.
>> Of _course_ spelling indicates
>> pronunciation. Even English, the mongrel of mongrels, works fairly well
>> that way in most cases.
>
>Yeah right. Try "rough" "through" "hic-cough"!!! (I know...exceptions
>to every rule and all that)
Well, the problem there is that English orthograohy was set down at the
time of the introduction of the printing press by Caxton. There were at
that time (15th century) as many ways of spelling as there were people who
wrote. It was decided that the pronunciation around the area south of
London would be used. At that time the 'k' in knife was pronounced, and
'ough' represented the same sound all the time. (for that dialect).
Pronunciation has evolved over the intervening 500 years, but spelling
hasn't.
>> >(Accents and umlauts are different beasties)
>>
>> Um, in what way do you see them as being different? If it helps, by all
>> means use a macron over the a when writing the word "Maori". The
>> double-a is just a stand in for an a-macron. Do you get annoyed when
>> someone writes "ue" instead of an umlauted "u"?
> _
>Try far and fat. When was the last time you saw far written to
>indicate a long vowel sound ?
>We don't do it in English. Why do it to Maori ?
Because Maori is a completely different language with different rules.
Have you ever learnt a foreign language? It doesn't seem so. Otherwise
you would understand that each language has its own systems. In Maori
long vowels *are* important as they are in Japanese. e.g. In Japanese you
have "kiita" and "kitta" and "kita" meaning "heard", "cut" and "came"
respectively (note the double *consonant* in no. 2). The distinction
between these must be made if you are to be understood.
<SNIP>
>My point was that there were ONLY 5 vowel sounds. As I understand it
>there are NO long and short vowels in the Maori language. The "a"
>sound is ALWAYS the same so why accent or double it.
Well, there are only 5 vowel *sounds*, but their length can determine
meaning. When looking at another language you have to accept that the
rules can be completelt different to English in ways you might not
imagine.
I suggest reading a few linguistic textbooks, and an excelllent book
called "The Story of English" by McCrum, Cram & MacNeil.
Keep cool 'till after school!
--
Mike Lyford, Tauranga, New Zealand (mly...@iconz.co.nz)
Michael Lyford
It looks pretty similar to the Arial font on the PC. It's useful for
transcribing Japanese into roman characters - it should be OK for Maori
too.
Michael Lyford
>
>
>>Maori has only existed as a written language in post european times
>>but has some fairly strict (and simple) rules for pronunciation.
>>language pretty well mastered. (The other trick is to break the
>>sylables after every vowel.)
>pronunciations like this.
I think the "wh" was used for the "f" sound because in some parts of the
country the same phoneme was pronounced either "wh" (as in white) or "f"
(as in 'f'). Although these days you get pounced on for saying
"Whangarei" as "Wangarei", even though it's an OK pronunciation.
I heard that the original dialect of Maori spoken in Northland actually
used the "w" sound not the "f". Is this true?
Stephen Judd
> Complete bollocks. Orthography ?????? What the hell is that ?? Could
> you provide an English translation.
Orthography: the accepted system of spelling, punctuation, etc. A
legitimate English word, easily found in any dictionary, and very
appropriate for this subject.
Would you like me to define dictionary for you?
> Try "far" and "war" then....
"Far" and "war" are in no danger of being confused in reading. But if I
write "popo", you can't tell whether I mean "knead" or "crowd around"
unless I indicate whether the o's are long or short. Of course, since you
already know that there is no difference and that there are only five
vowels, this won't mean anything to you either.
> This I believe is the crux of the matter: I've always been taught that
> in Maori language, there were ONLY 5 vowel sounds. No long and short
> variations. Could someone who actually knows what they are talking
> about provide an answer here ?
>
Since your definition of someone who knows what they are talking about
seems to be "someone who agrees with Jeremy", I doubt this very much. But
if knowledge gained by looking the answer up in a reputable reference text
counts, then I have been giving you the answer you wanted all along. Take
your pick.
Stephen.
Michael Lyford
<SNIP>
>This I believe is the crux of the matter: I've always been taught that
>in Maori language, there were ONLY 5 vowel sounds. No long and short
>variations. Could someone who actually knows what they are talking
>about provide an answer here ?
Well, I have a minor in Linguistics - whether that makes me qualified or
not, I don't know....
Anyway...you are right. Maori has only 5 vowels. BUT, they appear to be
able to be doubled. (I don't profess to having any expertise in Maori
specifically - but it does obey the basic language prinicpals) It is the
same in Japanese (see previous post by me). In general a doubled vowel is
just the same vowel produced for twice the amount of time. There is
usually no vocal pause. In some other polynesian languages they do
require pauses (sometimes) and show this by the insertion of an apostrophe
(e.g. Jay Laga'aia [sp?? Sorry, Jay]).
I have seen many things in Maori using a macron. It is a valid way of
showing a long vowel instead of just writing it twice.
Edouard Poor
>s.j...@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) expounded:
>> Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz writes:
>> _
>> > Try far and fat. When was the last time you saw far written to
>> > indicate a long vowel sound ?
>> > We don't do it in English. Why do it to Maori ?
>>
>> One reason we don't do it in English is that the orthography provides
>> enough other cues to adequately distinguish when we read.
>Complete bollocks. Orthography ?????? What the hell is that ?? Could
>you provide an English translation.
Never try arguing about another language, then have to ask what the words
being used in English mean. Doesn't come across well. :-)
It's like arguing about computers then half way through asking what
memory means. If you don't know, little bells should be going
"ting-a-ling" inside your head to alert you that maybe, just maybe, you
are in over your head in the argument.
But I did like the rebuttal of his argument ("Complete bollocks")
immediately before asking what the word he used actually meant. You've
almost got me 100% behind you by the sheer strength of your debating
skills so far :-)
Keep up the good work,
Edouard.
100026
>>
>> Give someone enough rope and they'll hang themselves! OK I let it go
>> the first time but I'll have to take issue with it this time.
>>
>> Is "titi" a real Maori word ? It sounds awfully like vulgar slang to
>> me. Not a good word to choose as an example as I would suspect the "i"
>> has been pronounced more like an English "i"
>
>It's in Bruce Biggs' Maori Dictionary defined as breast or nipple. it is
>an amusing coincidence, but so what? Bruce Biggs' credentails are about as
>good as they com in this field.
Well, they should be, but years ago when I attended his maori classes
at Auckland University he produced a whole string of words for members
of a boat's crew (don't ask me now what they were, I've forgotten)
which sounded as maori as does 'pukapuka' for 'book' or 'Henare' for
'Henry'. Yet he stood there in front of the class and in answer to my
question he insisted they were genuine maori words with no english
precedent. Quite frankly I did not believe him then and I do not now.
I have looked up 'titi' in Williams' dictionary, a more reputable
source than Biggs I suspect. Without quoting the whole text Williams
gives these meanings:
- Peg, pin
- Comb, for sticking in the hair
- Long streaks of cloud
- Radiating lines of tatooing on the centre of the forehead
- 'Stick in' as a peg
- Be fastened with pegs
- Shine
- Stick in pegs, feathers etc
- Adorn by sticking feathers etc into the hair
- Fasten with pegs or nails
- Steep
- Wooden collar or mouthpiece for a calabash
- Go astray
Not one breast or nipple among them. Mind you, Williams was a
missionary, but he was also a scholar. I doubt if he would fudge. I
wish I could say the same for Bruce Biggs.
- Eric Stevens
There are two classes of people in the world. Those who divide people
into two classes and those who don't. I belong to the second class.
Stephen Judd
100026,21...@compuserve.com (Eric Stevens) wrote:
<disturbing stuff about Bruce Biggs deleted>
> Not one breast or nipple among them. Mind you, Williams was a
> missionary, but he was also a scholar. I doubt if he would fudge. I
> wish I could say the same for Bruce Biggs.
>
>
Ulp. Ok, I'll give ground on that one. (Although H M Ngata's dictionary
gives tiitii=teat from English). But I believe my other examples still
stand.
stephen "always verify your references" judd
Stephen Wray
there are heaps.
I doubt that the Chinese (Mandarin) word for mother and father are
derived from the English-baby-talk-ish mama and dada, but that is exactly
what mother (mama) and father (dada) are in Mandarin.
Some "basic" words" may be similar from language to language, perhaps?
It is possible that the Chinese example cited *is* a loan-word from
English, but I doubt it.
It is possible that their similarity is *pure* coincidence, but I doubt
it.
I'm dead certain that the Maaaori people had a word for "nipple" damn it,
and if it *happens* to sound very similar to the English, I'm not *too*
surprised.
---
**********************T***H***E***L***E***M***A**********************
44. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of
result, is every way perfect. -- LIBER AL vel LEGIS
******************************IN*LVX*********************************
Stephen Wray <stephe...@vuw.ac.nz>
Michael Lyford
<BIG SNIP>
> Hmmn, I seem to have run out of oomph, so I'll just close by asking if
>anyone knows the history behind 'Akaroa' and 'Akaloa' on Banks Peninsula?
It's an interesting one that. In many languages (e.g. Japanese) there is
no distinction between 'l' and 'r'. And phonetically they are very
similar. Compare the Hawaiian "aloha" and the polynesian "aroha".
And we shouldn't disparige the Japanese (and others) for their inability
to distinguish between l/r b/v f/h in English. They have a few sounds
that cause us problems too. To consider other languages you have to move
out of the constraints of your own language. (I know this isn't what you
asked about - but I thought I'd say it anyway)
MacIIcx
pronounciation - a topic I find strangely interesting (as I have no
knowledge of the Maori language;... so I'm obviously a reputable source of
information !)
I'm glad that the 'wh' = 'f' topic has been discussed, and quite
intelligently too I believe.
It amuses me to imagine the first Europeans arriving in NZ, asking where
they were, and upon hearing 'Fangarei' milling around together, busy
working out that it should start with a 'wh'... They might not have been
very bright back then, but really...
The 'problem', as has been said, is that there is quite a difference in
Maori dialects, Mount Cook for instant can be called either 'Aorangi" or
'Aoraki' - depending on where you come from.
I caught a glimpse of 'Son of a Gunn' about November last year, and
they had someone talking about Maori constanants. He stated that in Maori
the constanants 'g' and 'l' are not used. Well I live in Otago, and
occasionally drive past Lake Waihola, so they are in Maori, just not his
dialect. And although I don't know the Maori language, I fell a 'local
miffedness' at the casual dismissal of the southern dialect.
Some people might smile about the word 'Otago' and say that it is
actually a European corruption of the 'correct Maori' 'Otakou' - but I
pre-empt this with the certain knowledge that 'Otago' is the 'correct'
local dialect for the region (well, part of the region anyway) and that
'Otakou' is a corruption of this, introduced by Europeans who learned
Maori in the North Island.
Hmmn, I seem to have run out of oomph, so I'll just close by asking if
anyone knows the history behind 'Akaroa' and 'Akaloa' on Banks Peninsula?
Pete Moore
> Hmmn, I seem to have run out of oomph, so I'll just close by asking if
>anyone knows the history behind 'Akaroa' and 'Akaloa' on Banks Peninsula?
"Akaroa" is a truncated (or bowdlerised? 8-)) version of "whakaroa". The
northern dialect equivalent would be "whangaroa". It means "long harbour".
--
+---------------- pe...@bignode.southern.co.nz ----------------+
GM/O -d+ -p+ c++ l u+ e+++ m++ s+/ n+ h+ f+ !g w+ t r- y+(*)
The effort to understand the universe is one of the very few things
that lifts human life above the level of farce, and gives it some
of the grace of tragedy - Steven Weinberg
Miche
pe...@bignode.southern.co.nz (Pete Moore) writes:
> MacIIcx (news.otago.ac.nz) wrote:
>
> > Hmmn, I seem to have run out of oomph, so I'll just close by asking if
> >anyone knows the history behind 'Akaroa' and 'Akaloa' on Banks Peninsula?
>
> "Akaroa" is a truncated (or bowdlerised? 8-)) version of "whakaroa". The
> northern dialect equivalent would be "whangaroa". It means "long harbour".
Yep, we have one of them in the south too, only in the local dialect,
it's 'wangaloa'.
James McNulty
ste...@debretts.comp.vuw.ac.nz (Stephen Wray) wrote:
What about the myth of Maui fishing up NZ? Only with European mapmakers
was it known that NZ was shaped like a fish.
Ta, James
Dave Eyles
: In article <jeremybyb...@ORAC.pec.co.nz>, Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz (Jeremy Bowen) writes:
: > This is the most unlikely explanation I've heard so far. There are
: > only the 5 basic vowel sounds in Maori.
: Which is why Maori is sometimes spelt Maaori - the "a" is a long
: vowel, which is exactly the same as two short ones run together if you
: belong to the 5 vowel-sound school.
: --
: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Logic's mad and shame doesn't care what you think.
: - Sam Phillips
: ------------------------- Jason Rumney (jas...@pec.co.nz) ----------------
Yes there is in fact ten vowels in maaori, as I have just learnt at my
cost on marks in Maaori 102.
aa a ee e ii i oo o uu u.
For instance aata = carefully. ata = morning
But what is confusing is that all the text books now use macrons over the
vowel to lengthen it, and so reading these texts we begin to get word
recognition but then we see a new, good book just published with the
doubled vowels instead of the macrons! It would be good for all students
of the language if this was quickly settled.
Stephen Bell
Dave Eyles <da...@brick.arch.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:
> Jason Rumney (jas...@pec.co.nz) wrote:
>
> : In article <jeremybyb...@ORAC.pec.co.nz>, Jer...@ORAC.pec.co.nz (Jeremy Bowen) writes:
>
> : > This is the most unlikely explanation I've heard so far. There are
> : > only the 5 basic vowel sounds in Maori.
>
> : Which is why Maori is sometimes spelt Maaori - the "a" is a long
> : vowel, which is exactly the same as two short ones run together if you
> : belong to the 5 vowel-sound school.
>
So in a word like "whakaaro," made from a word "aro" and a prefix "whaka"
both with short a's, is the sound in the middle a long "a"? I have heard
it pronounced as such, but alternatively pronounced as two short a's with
a glottal stop between them (as in wai-iti, which seems to be the only
Maori word or name where the stop is actually written, as a hyphen.
If whaka-aro does *not* have a long a in the middle, is the way of
writing it not confusing?
> Yes there is in fact ten vowels in maaori, as I have just learnt at my
> cost on marks in Maaori 102.
> aa a ee e ii i oo o uu u.
> For instance aata = carefully. ata = morning
> But what is confusing is that all the text books now use macrons over the
> vowel to lengthen it, and so reading these texts we begin to get word
> recognition but then we see a new, good book just published with the
> doubled vowels instead of the macrons! It would be good for all students
> of the language if this was quickly settled.
>
It took a hundred years or so for the English transliterators to settle
it in Russian ("Tchechov" vs "Chekhov" and poor "Tchaikovsky" never
managed to discard the old-style spelling).
Maori is fundamentally a syllabic language, not alphabetic at all, and wd
have gone better into Katakana; shame the Japanese didn't get here first.
Mind you, be thankful the French influence didn't get hold, or we'd have
abominations like "Tomboctou" to get rid of.
How many diphthongs are there, and how does "ai" differ from "ae" (as in
"Waikanae")?
--
/\ | Steve Bell <ah...@actrix.gen.nz>
___/_ \ | _ __ "The antidote to speech that disturbs
/\_ /\_\ |^, _) / you is more speech, not less."
/_ _\/_ _ \ | | (_) /__ Holly Hughes, artist.
Stephen Bell
Frank Pitt <fra...@mundens.equinox.gen.nz> wrote:
> In article <s.judd-0711...@poet.soe.waikato.ac.nz> ste...@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>
> >A quick check in the dictionary last night yielded examples of possible
> >confusion on every other page.
> >
> >
> > titi: nipple
>
> nipple is so close to the english vulgar one for breast.
> (which probably comes from the other english word for nipple, teat)
>
> Perhaps there's something in those stories about them coming from
> Egypt (Nefertiti ?)
>
Hence "Ra" for sun.
But OTOH, "Khaire" (welcome) is Greek.
I think people just make broadly similar noises with their mouths
everywhere in the world, and use short words, or simple words with repeated
syllables for the commonest or most personal things.
This reminds me of the story of the Egyptian Nefertiti lizard.
A biologist with a breast fetish got hold of one of these and crossbred it
with a lizard from the regions of South America around Lake Titicaca.
He got two nefercacas, and serve him right.
Nefertiti's name comes from "nefer" (beautiful) and "tete" a particle
indicating motion. "The beautiful one has come," is the usual
translation. Nothing to do with breasts at all.
If you look at contemporary full-body protraits of Nefertiti you'll see
her breasts are, as you might say, nothing to write home about; tho'
their saggy appearance is probably due to the exaggerated quest for the
unflattering truth in the art of the time - It may also have something to
do with the fact that she bore seven or eight daughters and just possibly
two sons (one being Tutankhamen); but their parentage is uncertain.
Stephen Bell
Eric Stevens <100026,21...@compuserve.com> wrote:
> s.j...@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Is "titi" a real Maori word ? It sounds awfully like vulgar slang to
> >> me. Not a good word to choose as an example as I would suspect the "i"
> >> has been pronounced more like an English "i"
> >
> >It's in Bruce Biggs' Maori Dictionary defined as breast or nipple. it is
> >an amusing coincidence, but so what? Bruce Biggs' credentails are about as
> >good as they com in this field.
>
[..]
>
> I have looked up 'titi' in Williams' dictionary, a more reputable
> source than Biggs I suspect. Without quoting the whole text Williams
> gives these meanings:
>
> - Peg, pin
> - Comb, for sticking in the hair
> - Long streaks of cloud
> - Radiating lines of tatooing on the centre of the forehead
> - 'Stick in' as a peg
> - Be fastened with pegs
> - Shine
> - Stick in pegs, feathers etc
> - Adorn by sticking feathers etc into the hair
> - Fasten with pegs or nails
> - Steep
> - Wooden collar or mouthpiece for a calabash
> - Go astray
>
> Not one breast or nipple among them.
Really? "mouthpiece for a round drinking vessel"?
Even "stick in as a peg" could be relevant.
Miche
ah...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz (Stephen Bell) writes:
> > Perhaps there's something in those stories about them coming from
> > Egypt (Nefertiti ?)
> >
> Hence "Ra" for sun.
Current opinion (so far as I know, which may not in fact be very
current) is that the Egyptians pronounced the name of their sun god as
R' (back-of-throat rolled R), so there goes that theory.
Miche
------------
michelle...@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
What I post is not the University's fault.
"If I had been around when Rubens was
painting, I would have been revered as a
fabulous model. Kate Moss? She would
have been the paintbrush."
- Dawn French
Ian Orchard
michelle...@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Miche) wrote:
> Current opinion (so far as I know, which may not in fact be very
> current) is that the Egyptians pronounced the name of their sun god as
> R' (back-of-throat rolled R), so there goes that theory.
How the hell did the archaeologists figure that one out? Did they find an
ancient Egyptian gramophone record collection?
--
Keep in touch......Ian O
I.Or...@irl.cri.nz * ......Where's my sig?
Industrial Research Ltd * ...Someone's stolen my sig!
ChCh, New Zealand * OK! No-one's allowed to leave the network!!
Stephen Judd
> How the hell did the archaeologists figure that one out? Did they find an
> ancient Egyptian gramophone record collection?
Several ways. Reconstruction from known languages which are related;
examination of transcriptions of Egyptian words in other languages; using
empirically derived rules of phonetic changes and examing descendant
languages (eg Coptic).
But a gramophone record would be nice. A CD would be even better ;-)
stephen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMMZG8xUyeNS0v/SRAQHtrQIAu3j/M7dzaD3VdhKt7aXELR6bnZl309jx
Z8kNV2PDlvPb8kymkqAEIzCetou/8WsnTFNOFGnHEkJVs02McHI22w==
=sNhQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
"I think you've said the opposite of | Stephen Judd, School of Education,
what you mean. Assuming that is the | University of Waikato, New Zealand.
case, I must disagree, strongly." | <finger://ste...@poet.soe.waikato.ac.nz>
(Found on sci.lang) | for my PGP key.
Hugh Rodwell
I.Or...@irl.cri.nz (Ian Orchard) wrote:
> How the hell did the archaeologists figure ... out [that the Egyptians
> pronounced the name of their sun god as R' (back-of-throat rolled R)]? Did
> they find an ancient Egyptian gramophone record collection?
Course not. The old Hammer Horror mummy movies provided the tip-off. What
they did was crosscheck hieroglyph statistics against wear patterns on
mummified tongues that had been torn out of people's heads. The R's and
the back-of-the-throat rolled bits matched perfectly.
Nothing to it.
Hugh
--
* Don't let them talk you into anything - See for yourself!
If you don't know it yourself - You just don't know it. BB '32 *
Hugh Rodwell
ste...@waikato.ac.nz wrote:
> > How the hell did the archaeologists figure that one out? Did they find an
> > ancient Egyptian gramophone record collection?
>
> Several ways. Reconstruction from known languages which are related;
> examination of transcriptions of Egyptian words in other languages; using
> empirically derived rules of phonetic changes and examing descendant
> languages (eg Coptic).
Well, Steve's right - it wasn't just the hard evidence of mummified
tongues! The decipherers of the Rosetta Stone, for instance, used every
clue available to them, particularly the help they got from the Greek. The
sort of thing done is exemplified in relation to Ancient Greek in 'The
Greek Language' by L.R.Palmer (Faber & Faber), and more particularly in
'Vox Graeca' by W. Sidney Allen (Cambridge), who's also written about the
pronunciation of Latin in 'Vox Latina' (Cambridge).
A really exciting field is the history and reconstruction of non-written
languages and language groups, where the nineteenth century groundwork
done on Indo-European using Sanskrit, Greek etc has been extended and
refined in relation especially to Native American languages. (Can't help
much with references off the cuff - try Scientific American which has had
several articles on this sort of thing in recent years.) I don't know how
much of this methodology has been put to work on Maori or other Polynesian
languages.
Cheers,
Hugh
PS In the PostModernism thread, linguistics has been called into question
as a science. The success of linguistic method in bringing ancient
pronunciations to life again makes me wonder what anyone could gain by
excluding linguistics from the scientific fold.
Miche
I.Or...@irl.cri.nz (Ian Orchard) writes:
> > Current opinion (so far as I know, which may not in fact be very
> > current) is that the Egyptians pronounced the name of their sun god as
> > R' (back-of-throat rolled R), so there goes that theory.
>
> How the hell did the archaeologists figure that one out? Did they find an
> ancient Egyptian gramophone record collection?
I have no idea to be quite honest! My fiance, who has studied
archaeology, has off the top of his head mooted something along the
lines of the Rosetta stone as a possible source. Personally, I'm
worried about Egyptologists spending so much time in the sun.
Stephen Bell
>On Sun, 3 Dec 1995 22:46:32 GMT, ah...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz (Stephen
>Bell) wrote:
>
>>In article <47rhqn$g...@dub-news-svc-5.compuserve.com>,
>>Eric Stevens <100026,21...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>>> s.j...@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) wrote:
>>>
>>> >>
>>
>>> >> Is "titi" a real Maori word ?
>>> gives these meanings:
>>>
>>> - Peg, pin
>>> - Comb, for sticking in the hair
>>> - Long streaks of cloud
>>> - Radiating lines of tatooing on the centre of the forehead
>>> - 'Stick in' as a peg
>>> - Be fastened with pegs
>>> - Shine
>>> - Stick in pegs, feathers etc
>>> - Adorn by sticking feathers etc into the hair
>>> - Fasten with pegs or nails
>>> - Steep
>>> - Wooden collar or mouthpiece for a calabash
>>> - Go astray
>>>
>>> Not one breast or nipple among them.
>>
>>Really? "mouthpiece for a round drinking vessel"?
>>Even "stick in as a peg" could be relevant.
>
>
>
And Freud, of course *invented* symbolism. Dear old Sigmund was the first
person to notice that a drinking gourd with a mouthpiece looked like a
breast.
Try "porcelain" Derives ultimately from Latin "porcus" (or in this case,
presumably "porca") - a pig/sow.
Fine china looked like a white shell; and the white shell, called
"porcellus" was one of those with a round side, and a side with a
slit-like inlet surrounded by pips. Hold it round side up and it looks
like a fat sow with nipples. Porca-procellus-porcelain.
Plenty of pre-Freud nipple/breast symbolism in our language, or any other.
The one that fascinates me is Hebrew "Shad" for "breast." Said to be the
source of "Shaddai" - the Almighty; one of the names of God.
--
Actrix Networks Limited Internet Service Providers.